a case for christ

[txag007 0]

...how absurd their ultra-specific beliefs are in light of the larger global picture. humanity as a whole is still in a very sad, immature state that we should be progressing beyond but currently aren't.

To which "ultra-specific" beliefs are you referring?

[crowTrobot 2]

...how absurd their ultra-specific beliefs are in light of the larger global picture. humanity as a whole is still in a very sad, immature state that we should be progressing beyond but currently aren't.

To which "ultra-specific" beliefs are you referring?

referring to this thread that jesus was the son of god rather than an obverblown historical human figure. and worse, in light of the huge range of human religious beliefs, specific belief in the christian interpretation of "god's" plan of salvation, heaven/hell etc. which even by low standards of logic in religious belief are blatantly obvious flawed self-contradictory human constructions.

[txag007 0]

referring to this thread that jesus was the son of god rather than an obverblown historical human figure.

So who do you believe he was? A good moral teacher? A lunatic?

and worse, in light of the huge range of human religious beliefs, specific belief in the christian interpretation of "god's" plan of salvation, heaven/hell etc. which even by low standards of logic in religious belief are blatantly obvious flawed self-contradictory human constructions.

What is it that you find contradictory?

[Loismustdie 0]

Dlink, I remember hearing a debate between Madaline O'Hare sp?( founder atheist church) and Walter Martin ( Christian ) about Christianity and she brought up the history of Chistianity is bloody. Martin's response was that they researched the numbers based on known populations of the world and the total number of killed due to Christian atrocities is about 5 million.In the first 50 years of Communism the total number killed is around 300 million.Walter Martin was the founder of the Christian Research Institute, had 3 earned PHDs in Philosophy, Comparative Religions, and Phsychology ( I think) so he's not some kook pulling numbers out of the sky.Sorry, but the generalization of Christian atrocities is a poor basis for conclusions. And the holocaust was not a Christian event, it was an athiest's event. Hitler taught evolutionary causes led to a superior Aryan race. Bible teaches Jews are God's chosen people.I do like reading people that have thought out arguements on religions. I use to argue all the time the evolution vs. Creation debate but have been away from the internet for awhile. I also get turned off really quick to name calling and shallowstabs, so your response is welcome.

Bible teaches Jews WERE gods chosen people- they rejected Jesus as the messiah so he took his gospel to the gentiles. Small detail, but important.

[Verbal Kint 0]

I find the Christian faith is fundementally different from my believes (and my religion though I am non practising). The idea that good is rewarded and bad is punished seems very simplistic and somewhat contrived. One should good for the sake of good without want of reward or fear of punishment. Also the idea of sending evil doers to hell for all eternity seems a little less than compassionate to me (yes I am a sap who believes in rehabilitation).  

Jesus teaches that you are saved ONLY through faith, not through 'good works'. If you are a Christian in your heart, you will act in love to other people naturally, but if you mess up you will always be forgiven if you want to be.I am reading another Lee Strobel book called 'Case for Faith'. I would recommend that one as well. I am impressed at this thread and this offer from Daniel. I look forward to reading through and processing the comments in this thread when I have the time.

[Verbal Kint 0]

humanity as a whole is still in a very sad, immature state that we should be progressing beyond but currently aren't.

And yet so many people won't even consider accepting the unconditional love and eternal hope that Jesus is offering us, and many actually get upset when it is presented to them!? Now THAT is sad!

The fact that if an old lady died alone....never hurt a soul in her life....perfect by anyone's standards BUT she was ignorant of God ie never heard of Him, was never taught about the bible etc. She would go to hell. I can't accept that.

This is not a fact - we have no idea how God would judge people in every circumstance. It is very limiting to base your whole belief system on specific situations!

[crowTrobot 2]

And yet so many people won't even consider accepting the unconditional love and eternal hope that Jesus is offering us, and many actually get upset when it is presented to them!?   Now THAT is sad!    

mature people don't have to brainwash themselves into believing fairy tales to find hope or love.enjoy your cult experience.

[crowTrobot 2]

I am impressed at this thread and this offer from Daniel.  

not me. i wasn't expecting someone with such an apparent high level of intuitive poker-style savvy to be so gullible when it comes to religious beliefs.

[ek703 0]

Trust me, i abhor people who hand out bibles in like secular places. I HATE KOREANS b/c they're all christ this and christ that and then they're sleeping with like 32423423432432 people. This is a key component to the hypocritical nature of christianity in my personal experiences. Growing up in an Amish/Mennonite community and being told of the love that God and Jesus have given us and how we should pass that along... And then being confronted with so many glaring images of hatred and malice... I know not all are Christians are horrible people and I attempt to not stereotype them as I would like them to not stereotype me...

[Balloon guy 158]

Hitler may have claimed catholism, quoted it and used it when it fit, but the basic tenet that the master race/Superman theory brought about because of evolution is much more an athiest view than any other world view. That was my only point. Too many make the lazy connection and group Hitler with Christianity because of his words. Maybe I am doing the same thing by lumping an evil man with a belief that isn't evil....just wrong IMHO.

eek, careful. hitler manipulated catholic doctrine no more than he manipulated nietzsche's philosophical work (a common misunderstanding, suggested by your use of "superman" above). suggested readings:the culture of disbelief, stephen cartera new religious america, diana eckand on what it means to be christian:fear and trembling, the practice of christianity, and christian discourses, soren kierkegaard (the best christian. ever.). and for the record, i'm an atheist, a grad student in religious studies/philosophy, and a kid who hates (well, strongly dislikes) george bush and the vast majority of evangelical zealots. why this is true should become clear if you read/understand carter's work above.

Check, Well written post, Sorry I ignored it for so long. Not sure you will see response, but here goes.Nietzsche didn't really come up with most of his theories until after spending the time in the concentration camps, which mean Hitler probably didn't get influenced by him. I imposed the Superman description to simplify. You are obviously are well educated so I will try to not simplify things anymore.I respect people that are well read and feel they are not convinced there is a God, much more than people that just want to be lazy.I am a well read high school graduate. But not a person who feels the need to challenge my beliefs for the sake of challenging them, so to be honest, I don't plan on reading the books you suggested. Also the one philosphy course I took in college makes me feel that you pay your nickle and pick your reality.I guess when rubber hits the road your beliefs will either bear out, or fall apart.If you continue your quest for knowledge and remain open minded, I'm sure you will do fine.So I agree to disagree, and admit you are better read then me, leaving me with too much catch up to keep up with you.But I'll play you heads up for a million dollars right now! :-)

[Loismustdie 0]

I find the Christian faith is fundementally different from my believes (and my religion though I am non practising). The idea that good is rewarded and bad is punished seems very simplistic and somewhat contrived. One should good for the sake of good without want of reward or fear of punishment. Also the idea of sending evil doers to hell for all eternity seems a little less than compassionate to me (yes I am a sap who believes in rehabilitation).  

Jesus teaches that you are saved ONLY through faith, not through 'good works'. If you are a Christian in your heart, you will act in love to other people naturally, but if you mess up you will always be forgiven if you want to be.I am reading another Lee Strobel book called 'Case for Faith'. I would recommend that one as well. I am impressed at this thread and this offer from Daniel. I look forward to reading through and processing the comments in this thread when I have the time.

No, the bible teaches faith without works is dead. Small detail but really changes what it means, and makes most christianity derivatives a lie.

[Loismustdie 0]

...how absurd their ultra-specific beliefs are in light of the larger global picture. humanity as a whole is still in a very sad, immature state that we should be progressing beyond but currently aren't.

To which "ultra-specific" beliefs are you referring?

referring to this thread that jesus was the son of god rather than an obverblown historical human figure. and worse, in light of the huge range of human religious beliefs, specific belief in the christian interpretation of "god's" plan of salvation, heaven/hell etc. which even by low standards of logic in religious belief are blatantly obvious flawed self-contradictory human constructions.

He spouts anti religous venom and has an avatar with Matusow with a card to his head- intelligance is not with this one guys.

[crowTrobot 2]

He spouts anti religous venom and has an avatar with Matusow with a card to his head- intelligance is not with this one guys.

yeah having a fun matusow avatar in a poker forum full of matusow fans makes no logical sense i guess. sorry i'm so unintelligent (at least i can spell it)

[rsmbox 1]

I am impressed at this thread and this offer from Daniel.  

not me. i wasn't expecting someone with such an apparent high level of intuitive poker-style savvy to be so gullible when it comes to religious beliefs.

i love people who call christians gullible...this is usually coming from the same people who accept the "theory" of evolution as fact simply because its what's put out in front of them to believe...i chose to believe something based on my faith and i'm gullible, they chose to believe something else based on faith as well (save the scientific "proof" claims) and they're intelligent...

[Loismustdie 0]

He spouts anti religous venom and has an avatar with Matusow with a card to his head- intelligance is not with this one guys.

yeah having a fun matusow avatar in a poker forum full of matusow fans makes no logical sense i guess. sorry i'm so unintelligent (at least i can spell it)

Oops, made a boo- boo, which will not cost me much. However, your boo- boo, turning you back on god? Very high price.

[timwakefield 68]

I am impressed at this thread and this offer from Daniel.

not me. i wasn't expecting someone with such an apparent high level of intuitive poker-style savvy to be so gullible when it comes to religious beliefs.

i love people who call christians gullible...this is usually coming from the same people who accept the "theory" of evolution as fact simply because its what's put out in front of them to believe...i chose to believe something based on my faith and i'm gullible, they chose to believe something else based on faith as well (save the scientific "proof" claims) and they're intelligent...

I agree, calling a christian gullible is silly...you might as well call anybody with any kind or religious or mystical or atheistic beliefs gullible. But evolution is NOT a theory in the sense that some quantum physics is still purely theoretical. In other words, unproven. The theory of evolution is a theory in the sense that gravity is a theory, or general relativity is a theory. Newton, Einstein, and Darwin were all scientifically accurate, and their theories have been extensively proven. Either you believe in the scientific method or you don't I suppose, but it really comes down to that. Evolution is scientific fact. Just because it is called a theory does not imply that it may be wrong. Quite the contrary: it is a theory which has been proven. There is a large, still growing body of knowledge which proves it's truth, and exactly zero evidence which calls it into question.

[guinevar 0]

I am impressed at this thread and this offer from Daniel.

not me. i wasn't expecting someone with such an apparent high level of intuitive poker-style savvy to be so gullible when it comes to religious beliefs.

i love people who call christians gullible...this is usually coming from the same people who accept the "theory" of evolution as fact simply because its what's put out in front of them to believe...i chose to believe something based on my faith and i'm gullible, they chose to believe something else based on faith as well (save the scientific "proof" claims) and they're intelligent...

I agree, calling a christian gullible is silly...you might as well call anybody with any kind or religious or mystical or atheistic beliefs gullible. But evolution is NOT a theory in the sense that some quantum physics is still purely theoretical. In other words, unproven. The theory of evolution is a theory in the sense that gravity is a theory, or general relativity is a theory. Newton, Einstein, and Darwin were all scientifically accurate, and their theories have been extensively proven. Either you believe in the scientific method or you don't I suppose, but it really comes down to that. Evolution is scientific fact. Just because it is called a theory does not imply that it may be wrong. Quite the contrary: it is a theory which has been proven. There is a large, still growing body of knowledge which proves it's truth, and exactly zero evidence which calls it into question.

Have you read "The Origin of the Species" ?

[timwakefield 68]

Yes I have. Why?

[Balloon guy 158]

I am impressed at this thread and this offer from Daniel.  

not me. i wasn't expecting someone with such an apparent high level of intuitive poker-style savvy to be so gullible when it comes to religious beliefs.

i love people who call christians gullible...this is usually coming from the same people who accept the "theory" of evolution as fact simply because its what's put out in front of them to believe...i chose to believe something based on my faith and i'm gullible, they chose to believe something else based on faith as well (save the scientific "proof" claims) and they're intelligent...

I agree, calling a christian gullible is silly...you might as well call anybody with any kind or religious or mystical or atheistic beliefs gullible. But evolution is NOT a theory in the sense that some quantum physics is still purely theoretical. In other words, unproven. The theory of evolution is a theory in the sense that gravity is a theory, or general relativity is a theory. Newton, Einstein, and Darwin were all scientifically accurate, and their theories have been extensively proven. Either you believe in the scientific method or you don't I suppose, but it really comes down to that. Evolution is scientific fact. Just because it is called a theory does not imply that it may be wrong. Quite the contrary: it is a theory which has been proven. There is a large, still growing body of knowledge which proves it's truth, and exactly zero evidence which calls it into question.

Sorry to jump into your debate, but evolution vs creation is my favorite debate.The scientific method requires one important thing, repeating the experiment, which is impossible with evolution.They tried to make some RNA in a controlled labratory and succeeded, but only after shooting electricity through a metal plate, which isn't spontaneous. Of the neccesary RNA and DNA's needed to make the simpleist organism, three are killed by O2...kinda of hard to understand who life sprouted up in an enviroment that kills part of it's makeup.Natural Scienes Know Nothing of Evolution by A.E. Wilder SmithLaws of thermodynamics prove entropy, things fall into a state of disorganization, not higher organization.Some of my favorite questions:Space dust is a known fact...we calculate it's weight on the space station, etc.Space dust falling on moon for millions of years would change mass of moon, over large scale time, larger moon.Gravitiational pull from moon would have been less 20 million years ago, causing tidal flows to by inadequate for sea life to be sustained.moon 5% larger would destroy coastlines everyday5% smaller would cause stagnentation of oceans2nd.Sun is expelling energy i.e. light heat etc.energy comes from mass being changed..Einsteintherfore, sun used to have more mass.sun 5% larger, sucks earth into itself, or at least bye bye marssun 5% smaller, not enough gravity on earth, bye bye earth.Current lifespan of earth is estimated at 4 billion years?hard to believe that the earth happened to fit precisely into the only slot that would allow it to handle the changeing gravitational pull from the sun, because there is no slot.3rdShana HiattCan anyone look at her and not think that there is a God?actually that's not very empirical...more subjective.I am not saying that all evolutionary studies are silly, just that as a whole, they are flawed enough to keep them a theory until we can re-create them...in otherwords, never.Last point, do you know how Paleontologist determine the age of the fossils they find? The rock strata layers give them a date that they can base the fossil's age on.Do you know how Geologist determine the age of the strata of rocks? Trace fossils.Circular reasoning

[Balloon guy 158]

double post..sorry

[greatwhite 0]

I don't have time to read this book. I'm still searching for the Holy Grail.

[crowTrobot 2]

I agree, calling a christian gullible is silly...you might as well call anybody with any kind or religious or mystical or atheistic beliefs gullible.

sounds good to me. agnostics rule!anyway my point about gulliblitiy had nothing to do with evolution, it had to do with christians accepting by faith the bible and its plan of salvation as the absolute word of a (the) creator, and supporting their faith with a flawed pinhole tunnel vision view of a few carefully selected historical events. whether there actually is a universal creator or not is an entirely different debate.

[crowTrobot 2]

The scientific method requires one important thing, repeating the experiment, which is impossible with evolution.They tried to make some RNA in a controlled labratory and succeeded, but only after shooting electricity through a metal plate, which isn't spontaneous. Of the neccesary RNA and DNA's needed to make the simpleist organism, three are killed by O2...kinda of hard to understand who life sprouted up in an enviroment that kills part of it's makeup.Natural Scienes Know Nothing of Evolution by A.E. Wilder SmithLaws of thermodynamics prove entropy, things fall into a state of disorganization, not higher organization.Some of my favorite questions:Space dust is a known fact...we calculate it's weight on the space station, etc.Space dust falling on moon for millions of years would change mass of moon, over large scale time, larger moon.Gravitiational pull from moon would have been less 20 million years ago, causing tidal flows to by inadequate for sea life to be sustained.moon 5% larger would destroy coastlines everyday5% smaller would cause stagnentation of oceans2nd.Sun is expelling energy i.e. light heat etc.energy comes from mass being changed..Einsteintherfore, sun used to have more mass.sun 5% larger, sucks earth into itself, or at least bye bye marssun 5% smaller, not enough gravity on earth, bye bye earth.Current lifespan of earth is estimated at 4 billion years?hard to believe that the earth happened to fit precisely into the only slot that would allow it to handle the changeing gravitational pull from the sun, because there is no slot.I am not saying that all evolutionary studies are silly, just that as a whole, they are flawed enough to keep them a theory until we can re-create them...in otherwords, never.Last point, do you know how Paleontologist determine the age of the fossils they find? The rock strata layers give them a date that they can base the fossil's age on.Do you know how Geologist determine the age of the strata of rocks? Trace fossils.Circular reasoning

nothing personal, but this is the most BS loaded post i've seen yet here on this subject. virtually everything you said is incorrect or misrepresented.you don't have to repeat evolution to see evidence for it, that's not how science works. in any case we CAN see short time-scale adaptive, selective evolution happening in nature all around us, and can using normal logic extrapolate what is most likely to have happened long-term and in more extreme environmental changes. the fossils are just supporting evidence.i think that's false about space dust on the moon, and even if it were true the orbit of the moon could have shifted (probably has) further out since it broke off from the earth so tidal forces could have been even greater in the past. and also the moon like the earth on a long-term time scale certianly has been absolutely bombarded by meteors and comets probably sending a lot of its mass far enough out to where the earths gravity would capture it.the life cycle of stars is pretty complicated, but to put it simply stars with the mass of our sun have a long relatively stable, balanced period where they don't burn their mass that quickly, about 8 billion years in this case. in another ~4 billion years our sun will relatively quickly lose the balance (lose enough mass to reach a critical point where it can't sustain the gravity it needs for balance) and baloon to a red giant engulfing earth, but for now there is certainly a long-term stable orbital slot for the earth to be in (obviously).scientists use atomic beta-decay and other methods to age both strata and fossils. they only age one based on the other when the age of one is already proven from other methods, typically by multiple methods that give the same result. there is nothing circular about it.what's silly is using arguments like yours to support religeous belief, because you're assuming you have complete information about the subjects, when you're actually dealing with grossly oversimplified creatonist propaganda.

[crowTrobot 2]

Shana HiattCan anyone look at her and not think that there is a God?actually that's not very empirical...more subjective.

part of her is certainly man-made

[guinevar 0]

To those who have read the origin of the species, what does darwin remark about the development of certain organs such as the human eye?He makes particular reference to it. Check it out.